One sure sign of whether ‘Acquisition 360′ will actually matter

FCW ran a story late last week on a March 18 memo from Anne Rung, administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, to agency chief acquisition officers and senior procurement executives, entitled “Acquisition 360 – Improving the Acquisition Process through Timely Feedback from External and Internal Stakeholders.” The memo also got a fair amount of attention on the Twittersphere.

By “360 feedback,” of course, Rung means that everybody rates everybody else. So the memo establishes a program, starting with major IT acquisitions, for surveys to obtain contractor feedback to the government, program office feedback to the contracting office, and contracting office feedback to the program office.

Keep reading this article at: http://fcw.com/blogs/lectern/2015/03/comment-acquisition-360.aspx

Audit: HHS failure to screen Obamacare contract recipients cost taxpayers $400M

Not even good enough for government work.

An internal investigation into how the federal government awarded contracts for developing and building the Affordable Care Act’s most important public element — the online exchanges that were to be used by millions of Americans to purchase health insurance — has found the process was fraught with obvious and expensive errors.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) failed to conduct background checks on prior work by companies awarded many of the Obamacare contracts and failed to require those same companies to be accountable for cost overruns, leaving taxpayers on the hook instead.

The report published Jan. 22, 2015 by the Office of the Inspector General for HHS concludes those mistakes soaked taxpayers for more than $400 million in unexpected costs — essentially doubling the expected cost of building the exchanges in the first place.

Keep reading this article at: http://watchdog.org/194839/obamacare-contracts-cost-taxpayers/

Company excluded from competition protests $5 billion Army IT contract

A $5 billion Army contract program for information technology that’s almost two years behind schedule could be delayed even longer, as at least one company excluded from the competition files a protest in a federal court.

MicroTechnologies LLC of Virginia confirmed it filed a protest Jan. 9 in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims against the Army’s decision to exclude the company’s bid for the Information Technology Enterprise Solutions-3 Hardware program, or ITES-3H, to supply the Army commercial IT hardware.

While all documents in the case are sealed, MicroTech General Counsel and Chief Administrative Officer Aaron Drabkin said the grounds mirror those included in its protest filed with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which was denied in October 2014. The company raised several challenges to the agency’s evaluation of its past performance.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/blog/fedbiz_daily/2015/01/microtech-protests-5b-ites-3h-contract-in-federal.html

GAO: Most agencies still not providing complete data on contractors’ past performance

Although their level of compliance has improved over the last year, most federal agencies still haven’t met established governmentwide targets for providing complete, timely and accurate information on contractors’ past performance, congressional investigators found.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) said compliance among the top 10 agencies – based on the number of contracts that each agency needed to evaluate – varied greatly, ranging from 13 percent to 83 percent, as of April.

Only two departments – Defense and Treasury – had compliance rates above 65 percent, said the GAO report released Aug. 7.

The Office of Federal Procurement Policy, or OFPP, which has been trying to improve agency compliance on this issue, had wanted all such departments to reach or exceed that 65-percent threshold by the end of fiscal 2013, GAO said.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.fiercegovernment.com/story/gao-most-agencies-still-not-providing-complete-data-contractors-past-perfor/2014-08-12

Agencies often fail to report contractors’ performance

Most of the top federal government agencies have not complied with regulations requiring them to report contractors’ performance to a central database used by government purchasers, according to a recent report by Congress’s watchdog.

While the agencies showed improvement, only two of the 10 departments surveyed by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) met their goal, investigators found, which stymies the government’s ability to know if it is dealing with reputable firms.

“Government agencies rely on contractors to perform a broad array of activities to meet their missions,” the GAO wrote. “Therefore, complete and timely information on contractors’ past performance is critical to ensure the government does business only with companies that deliver quality goods and services on time and within budget.”

The shared database acts like Yelp or Angie’s List — Web sites where consumers rate all sorts of businesses — for government purchasers, who spend billions of dollars annually.

Keep  reading this article at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/agencies-often-fail-to-report-contractors-performance/2014/08/08/87cc1f76-1f02-11e4-82f9-2cd6fa8da5c4_story.html

Pentagon ranks top suppliers to spark competition among contractors

The Defense Department’s acquisition chief on Friday (June 13, 2014) released a ranking of the top 30 supplier units within the contracting industry as part of a continuing effort to improve the government’s largest procurement operations by curbing costs and professionalizing the workforce.

Frank Kendall III, undersecretary of Defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, introduced the first rankings from a Navy Department pilot project called the Superior Supplier Incentive Program. Designed to help industry “recognize its better performers” based on past performance and evaluations by program managers, such a list is planned for all the services beginning to build incentives, Kendall told reporters. “The industry people who will respond the most will be the ones at the bottom,” he said.

Sean Stackley, assistant Navy secretary for research, development and acquisition industry, said “industry best practices include recognizing the best suppliers, which gives them an incentive to sustain superior performance.” The selections were made through a process designed to be “fair and objective and understood by the public and Congress, as well as easy to manage,” Stackley said.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.govexec.com/contracting/2014/06/pentagon-ranks-top-suppliers-spark-competition-among-contractors/86473/

For the annual report on the performance of the Defense Acquisition System, click here.  

Why past performance must be part of acquisition reform

Although the failed rollout of HealthCare.gov brought attention to how the federal government purchases technology, little consideration has been given to how contractors with poor track records of performance continue to get federal contracts.

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), chairwoman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee’s Financial and Contracting Oversight Subcommittee, raised this issue at a recent hearing by saying that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services “could have avoided a black eye” for the failed rollout of the HealthCare.gov website if the agency had had relevant data on the past performance of CGI Federal.

That raises the question of what is being done to improve data on contractors’ past performance. And perhaps more important, why is past-performance data not being captured properly in the first place?

Last year, the government issued a new rule in an attempt to create governmentwide, standardized contract performance rating and evaluation factors for federal contractors. However, without the metrics and objective performance parameters needed to create uniformity and consistency in the evaluations of a contractor’s past performance, the rule simply continued the current system of subjective ratings by evaluators.

Keep reading this article at: http://fcw.com/articles/2014/04/11/comment-gracia-past-performance-data.aspx 

GSA acquisition database integration pushed back to 2018

The General Services Administration (GSA) pushed back the planned completion date of an integrated acquisition database to 2018 because of development problems and cost overruns, GSA Assistant Commissioner Kevin Youel Page told a Senate panel March 6.

“We’ve suffered our own missteps,” Page said during a hearing of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee subcommittee on financial and contracting oversight.

Plans were made in 2001 to combine governmentwide acquisition databases into a single system called the Integrated Acquisition Environment.

But the project has been plagued with problems.

A March 2012 Government Accountability Office report says cost overruns, which grew by 89 percent, were largely due to mistakes GSA has made. GAO initially estimated it would cost about $95.7 million, but the 2012 estimate came in at $181.1 million.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.fiercegovernment.com/story/gsa-acquisition-database-integration-pushed-back-2018/2014-03-07 

t

Data on contractor past performance is missing or inaccurate

Four interagency databases designed to warn contracting officers about a company’s past performance are riddled with problems that can become expensive agency boondoggles, a senator declared at an oversight hearing Thursday.

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., blasted as “shockingly old and clunky” the databases pioneered by the Navy and now administered governmentwide by the General Services Administration, calling for more complete information on whether contractors, for example, have been suspended and debarred.

She criticized the Office of Management and Budget for not sending a witness to a hearing she held as chairwoman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs contracting subcommittee. McCaskill also said the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services “could have avoided a black eye” for the “very public failure” of the rollout of the Healthcare.gov website last fall had it been able to discover more on the past performance of the contractor CGI Federal.

Since passage of the 2002 E-Government Act, agencies have sought to consolidate and centralize online data on contractors’ performance history including contract terminations, criminal acts and administrative adjudications. The chief databases that managers may consult include the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), the Federal Awardee Performance Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) and the System for Award Management.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.govexec.com/contracting/2014/03/senator-some-data-contractor-past-performance-missing-or-inaccurate/80062

 

DoD re-emphasizes importance of contractor past-performance reporting

The Defense Department’s contracting chief, Frank Kendall, has called for renewed emphasis on the importance of agency reporting on contractor performance.

In a January 9, 2014 memorandum to the Department of Defense (DoD) acquisition workforce, DoD Undersecretary for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics points out that while the reporting goal for FY14 is 95 percent, compliance with the goal is at only 81.5 percent department-wide.

Only first quarter FY14 data are available at this point.  Past performance reports are to be filed in Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS).

An analysis of first quarter FY14 data shows that while five units within DoD have a reporting record of 90 percent or better, there are eight DoD units with 50 percent or lower reporting compliance.  Most of these are small units with a small amount of contracting activity.

A DoD unit with a significant number of contract closeouts coupled with a high rate of reporting non-compliance is the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA).  DCMA’s reporting percentage is 68.5 percent.

The  Navy, Army and Air Force have the highest numbers of contracts and contract closeouts.  While their levels of reporting are relatively high (85, 78, and 87 percent, respectively), each has a high number of overdue reports as of the end of the first quarter.  The Army has 8,810 past due reports, while the Navy and Air Force have 3,023 and 1,737 late reports, respectively.

The memorandum and its attachment can be seen here: USA000068-14-DPAP.